Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Increasing biodiversity in urban green spaces through simple vegetation interventions

Open access
Threlfall, Caragh G., Mata, Luis, Mackie, Jessica A., Hahs, Amy K., Stork, Nigel E., Williams, Nicholas S. G., Livesley, Stephen J.·2017·Journal of Applied Ecology

Abstract

Summary: Cities are rapidly expanding world‐wide and there is an increasing urgency to protect urban biodiversity, principally through the provision of suitable habitat, most of which is in urban green spaces. Despite this, clear guidelines of how to reverse biodiversity loss or increase it within a given urban green space is lacking. We examined the taxa‐ and species‐specific responses of five taxonomically and functionally diverse animal groups to three key attributes of urban green space vegetation that drive habitat quality and can be manipulated over time: the density of large native trees, volume of understorey vegetation and percentage of native vegetation. Using multi‐species occupancy‐detection models, we found marked differences in the effect of these vegetation attributes on bats, birds, bees, beetles and bugs. At the taxa‐level, increasing the volume of understorey vegetation and percentage of native vegetation had uniformly positive effects. We found 30–120% higher occupancy for bats, native birds, beetles and bugs with an increase in understorey volume from 10% to 30%, and 10–140% higher occupancy across all native taxa with an increase in the proportion of native vegetation from 10% to 30%. However, increasing the density of large native trees had a mostly neutral effect. At the species‐specific level, the majority of native species responded strongly and positively to increasing understorey volume and native vegetation, whereas exotic bird species had a neutral response. Synthesis and applications. We found the probability of occupancy of most species examined was substantially reduced in urban green spaces with sparse understorey vegetation and few native plants. Our findings provide evidence that increasing understorey cover and native plantings in urban green spaces can improve biodiversity outcomes. Redressing the dominance of simplified and exotic vegetation present in urban landscapes with an increase in understorey vegetation volume and percentage of native vegetation will benefit a broad array of biodiversity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1365-2664.12876

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Threlfall, C. G., Mata, L., Mackie, J. A., Hahs, A. K., Stork, N. E., Williams, N. S. G., & Livesley, S. J.
Venue
Journal of Applied Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-02-23
Volume
54
Issue
6
Pages
1874-1883
ISSN
  • 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2664
OpenAlex
W2581177395
Cited by
406
References
30
FWCI
16.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Increasing biodiversity in urban green spaces through simple vegetation interventions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1365-2664.12876
The paper
Threlfall, C. G., Mata, L., Mackie, J. A., Hahs, A. K., Stork, N. E., Williams, N. S. G., & Livesley, S. J. (2017). Increasing biodiversity in urban green spaces through simple vegetation interventions. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12876

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.